Dr. Manges PhD | Forensic Psychologist | Expert Witness
Can We Talk Honestly in Public?
“We are what our thoughts have made us; so take care about what you think. Words are secondary.
Thoughts live; they travel far.”
Jury deselection, in Texas, Florida, Ohio, New York, Illinois and elsewhere can be a challenge. The judge has discretion as to if, what and how long a Voir Dire may take. Group Voir Dire is the rule, because individual Voir Dire consumes too much time and lacks the efficiency of asking everyone the same questions simultaneously. Lets face it, because litigation is also about economics and group Voir Dire helps to move the case along, individual Voir Dire is the go to choice.
When should an individual Voir Dire motion be considered? Part of the answer is when there are socially sensitive issues and community prejudices that would not likely be admitted to by a juror in open court.
Nietzel et. al., writing in Law and Human Behavior, studied the effects of individually questioning jurors with 13 capital murder cases and found more defense challenges for cause were sustained when jurors were questioned individually then when questioned as a group.
[biginfobox textcolor=”#ffffff” title=”Contact Dr. Manges to learn more about how his expertise can be an asset to your case.” href=”https://kenmanges.com/contact-us/” button_title=”Call us now!”][/biginfobox]
In a separate study Nietzel et. al. made a similar finding where in 18 other capital murder cases defense challenges for cause were granted when the jurors were questioned individually then when questioned in a group.
This author found in separate cases when an issue of a sexual crime was the focus of attention at trial that individual Voir Dire provided more juror refusal to participate due to personal prejudice, when compared to similar cases in which individual Voir Dire was not requested by defense counsel.
It would not be uncommon for a juror to resist speaking about a personal prejudice or sensitivity in court. It is unlikely that a juror would request of the judge a personal conference to discuss their distress. Nor would it be uncommon for a juror to remain silent and not disclose their prejudice so as to avoid a personal embarrassment.
However, it would be appropriate and sensitive for an attorney to anticipate such sensitive issues and to make the request of the court for individual Voir Dire; even if based on past experience, the judge was considered less than accommodating.
Dr. Kenneth Manges, is a Forensic Psychologist and vocational expert who offers consultation and comprehensive evaluations across the United States. His analyses have been recognized for their clarity and scientific rigor. He offers reasonably certain opinions about the psychological impact of physical injury or emotional trauma as they effect earning capacity and the impact of loss on future work and quality of life. Well regarded in the litigation arena, he is a trusted and respected authority and offers evaluations that have been consistently upheld in both state and federal courts.